FACTS:
Accused-appellant was charged with the crime of rape of a girl less than nine years old. The court rendered a decision finding appellant guilty as charged. However, during the proceeding, accused-appellant was not represented by a member of the Bar. Hence, he filed a Notice of Appeal and praying that the judgment against him be set aside on the ground that he was denied of his right to be represented by a counsel which results to the denial of due process. The Office of the Solicitor General maintains that notwithstanding the fact that appellant's counsel during the trial was not a member of the Bar, he was afforded due process since he was given opportunity to be heard and records reveal that said person handled the case in a professional and skillful manner.
ISSUE:
Whether or not a person not member of the Philippine Bar may represent an accused in a criminal proceeding.
HELD:
NO.
The presence and participation of counsel in criminal proceedings should never be taken lightly. Even the most intelligent or educated man may be convicted without a counsel, not because he is guilty but because he does not know how to establish his innocence.
The right of the accused to counsel is guaranteed to minimize the imbalance in the adversarial system where the accused is pitted against the awesome prosecutory machinery of the State. A person has the right to due process, he must be heard before being condemned - a part of person's basic rights. The right to counsel of an accused is enshrined in the Constitution (Art. III,Secs. 12 & 14(2)], Rules of Criminal Procedure (Sec. 1 of Rule 115), Art. 8, Sec. 5 of the Constitution and the Rules of Court (Sec. 1 of Rule 138)
The assailed judgment is Set Aside, and the case is hereby Remanded to the trial court for new trial.
Accused-appellant was charged with the crime of rape of a girl less than nine years old. The court rendered a decision finding appellant guilty as charged. However, during the proceeding, accused-appellant was not represented by a member of the Bar. Hence, he filed a Notice of Appeal and praying that the judgment against him be set aside on the ground that he was denied of his right to be represented by a counsel which results to the denial of due process. The Office of the Solicitor General maintains that notwithstanding the fact that appellant's counsel during the trial was not a member of the Bar, he was afforded due process since he was given opportunity to be heard and records reveal that said person handled the case in a professional and skillful manner.
ISSUE:
Whether or not a person not member of the Philippine Bar may represent an accused in a criminal proceeding.
HELD:
NO.
The presence and participation of counsel in criminal proceedings should never be taken lightly. Even the most intelligent or educated man may be convicted without a counsel, not because he is guilty but because he does not know how to establish his innocence.
The right of the accused to counsel is guaranteed to minimize the imbalance in the adversarial system where the accused is pitted against the awesome prosecutory machinery of the State. A person has the right to due process, he must be heard before being condemned - a part of person's basic rights. The right to counsel of an accused is enshrined in the Constitution (Art. III,Secs. 12 & 14(2)], Rules of Criminal Procedure (Sec. 1 of Rule 115), Art. 8, Sec. 5 of the Constitution and the Rules of Court (Sec. 1 of Rule 138)
The assailed judgment is Set Aside, and the case is hereby Remanded to the trial court for new trial.
Comments
Post a Comment